Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Friday, December 05, 2008
Jonah Goldberg :: Townhall.com Columnist
The Foggy Crystal Ball
by Jonah Goldberg
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


These are humbling times for champions of the free market and American-style capitalism. The CEOs of the Big Three car companies are kneeling before Uncle Sam like Henry in the snows of Canossa. The stock market volatility these days is looking more and more like a death rattle. No one wants to check their 401(k) for fear of their face melting like that Gestapo guy in "Raiders of the Lost Ark" when he peeked inside the Ark of the Covenant.

But while we cheerleaders for economic liberty need to take our lumps and spend some time thinking about where things went wrong, it would be nice if the Chicken Littles spent a wee bit of time doing likewise.

Exhibit A: China. You can't pick up a copy of Newsweek without reading something by Fareed Zakaria about how China will only get larger and larger in our rearview mirror. Five years ago, Goldman Sachs predicted that China's GDP would overtake America's by 2041. Now it thinks that China will reach us in 2027. (Of course, with a much bigger population, China's per-capita wealth would be much lower than ours.) The National Intelligence Council's new report, "Global Trends 2025: A Transformed World," echoes these concerns.

Heck, maybe they're all right. Maybe not. The simple fact is that no one knows.

But I'd bet against it.

First of all, there's a long record of very smart people making very bad predictions. Just Google "bad predictions" and you'll see what I mean. In 1943, the chairman of IBM said, "I think there is a world market for maybe five computers." Legend has it the head of the U.S. Patent Office said in 1899, "Everything that can be invented has been invented." Neville Chamberlain prophesied "peace in our time."

And roughly two decades ago, the best and brightest were telling us that "Japan Inc." was going to overtake America any day now.

"Future historians," warned Harvard's Ezra Vogel in 1986, "may well mark the mid-1980s as the time when Japan surpassed the United States to become the world's dominant economic power." Yale's Paul Kennedy wrote a blockbuster of a book concluding that American policies should be designed to manage our decline "so that the relative erosion of the United States' position takes place slowly and smoothly." When Jacques Attali was head of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development in 1991, he observed that America was becoming akin to "Japan's granary, like Poland was for Flanders in the seventeenth century."

Journalist James Fallows, political scientist Chalmers Johnson and economist Lester Thurow were fawned over for their supposedly incontrovertible conclusion that Japan was the future. "The Cold War is over," Johnson wrote, "and Japan won."

Then, as you may have heard, the Japanese economy went kablooey.

The Japan example not only demonstrates that smart people can be wrong and that the elite chattering classes are prone to groupthink, but it helps illuminate why they are so prone to this sort of thing.

For more than a century, countless American intellectuals and business leaders have looked enviously at how foreign countries "planned" and "managed" their economies. Woodrow Wilson and the Progressives drooled over Otto von Bismarck, and today every self-proclaimed "global strategist" gazes at China's managed capitalism like a kid with his nose pressed against a candy-store window.

Of course, China has made enormous progress since it decided that markets are a more desirable means of improving the lot of its citizens than organized mass murder. But China's fans still have an enormous blind spot.

Ask yourself this: Why are we in this financial crisis?

Any short list of reasons would include a lack of transparency in markets and regulatory rule-making; collusion between business and government; the politicization of lending practices (including the socialization of risk and the privatization of profit through giant governmental entities like Fannie Mae); and, of course, simple greed.

Does anyone honestly think China doesn't have these problems 10 times over? It has no free press, no democratic accountability and no truly independent regulators.

After every Chinese earthquake, we discover that safety inspectors couldn't be trusted to oversee the construction of schools and hospitals. And we're supposed to believe that China's corrupt model produces toxic baby formula but spic-and-span finances?

There's an honest debate about how much blame institutions like Fannie Mae and laws like the Community Reinvestment Act deserve for the financial crisis, but few honest observers dispute that they played some kind of deleterious role. Well, China's entire economy is one big Fannie Mae, its laws one big Community Reinvestment Act.

I'm willing to bet that the bill for that comes due long, long, long before China catches up with the United States of America.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Jonah Goldberg is editor-at-large of National Review Online.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Jonah Goldberg's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
The left
will never admit that Fannie, Freddie and the CRA had anything to do with today's economic collapse.

Intellectuals...
...are very necessary in a society as long as we don't give them what they want the most:Political power.I believe it was Eric Hoffer that made that observation many years ago.I'd rather be governed by the Big Three auto companies or the five largest oil companies than the United States Congress.We'd all get a better shake.Please spare us from the university intellectual!

And you think you know?
yes intellectuals and business leaders have a poor track record in predicting the future. Guys like you Jonah don't have a chance!

China's rise...
...was not predictable until Hong Kong was returned to them. Now exposed to market capitalism the trend toward freedom and prosperity will continue unless stopped by violent means.

Intellectuals of various stripe tend to be ideologues which might help their careers politically but is a poor basis for prognostication.

They are the champions of the preconceived notion which invariably leads them to a wrong conclusion.

Lesser lights, with only common sense at their command, are not bound by their absolute trust in their own thinking and have fewer obstacles to the right answer.

I'm sure that penthouse living in an ivory tower is quite commodious, but the real usable data flows up from the bottom where life is taking place.

There is one big difference

In China, when a politician screws up bigtime, it's "off with his head". If we had that deterrent here, Barney Frank would now be riding around Sleepy Hollow seeking out Ichabod Crane, but for a different reason than the original headless horseman had.

Lead Dog
Unless you're the lead dog the view doesn't change.

Forget China
China may well have similar systemic problems as we, just building to boil over. But we have the boiling kettle right now and need to address it. Indeed, I would argue that Fannie, Freddie and the Community Reinvestment Act created the atmosphere which allowed this disaster to develop. Normal thinking people, especially business people, who are forced into making bad loans will try to find ways to diminish the losses incurred. Thus credit derivatives, credit default swaps, packaging, creative risk assessments, etc.

Politicians, being politicians, ignore the timber in their own eye and are pointing their fingers at business. Having the powers of government, and a friendly press, they've been successful at misleading many. I've lost all confidence in our government to solve any issue, big or small. Whatever they touch they end up destroying.

We don't need brilliant people in Washington to correct these issues. Rather, this mess calls for average people who possess honesty and integrity whether in Washington and business.

The Founders
of this nation recognized that humankind evolves at a glacial pace. They knew that all of the deadly sins would continue to be problematic to governance forever and therefore charged congress with the regulation of comerce.
Humans are still in the animal kingdom and will be governed by animalistic urges until they make themselves extinct.
The lessons of the past haven't been taught in schools and have been ignored or misinterpreted by those to whom they were taught.
Regulation of comerce is the only way to control the inheirant corruption in a capitalistic society.
Where industry willfully acts against a portion of society or does so with indifference, we need regulatiions to force corrective behaviour.

Clear Crystal Ball
Everyone is so busy watching China, but Europe is about to replace America as the world's greatest power. President Tony Blair will become the most powerful leader in history.

After a time China will march against him.

Our doom fast approaches......

Merry Christmas :)

Mr Bill
Wow. One of the most incoherent posts I've ever seen on Town Hall. After some gibberish about the Founders, sin, animal urges, you jump to an unbased claim about the need for more pervasive government control of markets.

The founders knew that there was an arc to humans societal evolution, but also, as in there case, there were a few moments of genuine sea-change in human opportunity. They elevated liberty, virtue, and collaboration above despotism and vice. Your analysis, Mr. Bill, is ridiculous.

Tell me how, exactly, you find that the men who initiated the Boston Tea Party (in opposition to taxes without representation), who composed the Federalist Papers (staking out the proper relationship between national and local governments and the citizens - not even close to what you suggest), who very reluctantly took on the pressures of government building (their own) so they could live free... tell me how you derive from their example that they were for GREATER GOVERNMENT CONTROL????

Liberals never cease to amaze with their willfully idiotic, selective reading of history. They only find themselves in the great ideas of the past, even when they are diametrically opposed.

The Founders were indeed liberals, but in the classical (Greek, Roman, Enlightenment) sense. There is no way they would have identified with an ideology that thinks government should control business, that thinks I should be able to marry my brother or my dog, that thinks morality is just relative, or that thinks rights grow exponentially based on the desires of the aggrieved.

Sometimes ignorance is just obscene.

Second paragraph:
should have said "... as in their case...".

Sometimes ignorance is indeed obscene.

I just don't get it....
My father beat into my head the following philosophy:

If you can't afford to pay cash for something, you really don't need it.

Such a philosophy applied to everything except a mortgage and (in the past 5 - 7 years) a mode of personal transportation. I appliead said philosophy through 25 years of raising children, doing without while watching others "keeping up with the Jones'" and now... even though I am just like 95% of the rest of the United States that are paying their mortgages. I am just like 93% of those folks in the USA that are employed, enjoying an income that supports the best lifestyle that I can give my family...

And yet I am supposed to come up with MY hard earned money in the form of paying more taxes and saddling MY kids with the burden of having to pay even MORE taxes ad infiniti....

Just so a miniscule portion of people who made extremely stupid decisions can keep the possessions that they shouldn't ever had in the first place???

It doesn't matter if one is a Democrat, Liberal, Rupublican, or a Conservative - it is just plain wrong.

Back in the 50's and 60's, if you couldn't afford something or if life threw lemons at you, you went back home - regrouped - got back on track - downsized so that you could live within your means.

Why is it that we can't do that again?

Puzzled

Steve in PA
To Steve in PA, your subject "Mr. Bill"

Well said!

You've gotta be kidding me....
Jonah, your short list of causes includes....GREED?
You're joking, right? When conservative commentators tell me greed caused our financial woes, we're in a heapa trouble. Let's leave that ignorant pap to the liberals, please.

THers
Hoa - thanks. Jude - amen. Redsand - ditto.

Inevitablility
Everyone here should read a little Ludwig Von Mises and Henry Hazlitt (you can get to their material free at the Von Mises institute online). The left has been talking about the inevitability of some socialist scheme after another matched with the demise of capitalism for over 100 years.

Of course, only one brand at any given time is true socialism - the one who is championing it. Trotsky claimed that Stalinism wasn't true socialism (in only one sense they were right because all socialist schemes would have collapse early were it not for western aid with price setting or direct food aid). Stalin called Trotsky a Nazi. After WWII, the left proclaimed that (after years of steadfast support) that Mussolini wasn't a true socialist, and of course (my personal favorite), Hitler was a right winger.

crystal balls and foreign boogeymen
No one should need a crystal ball to see that the problems suffered by America are suffered by both Europe and China in spades; socialism is dead weight around their necks, and no one should think that what hurts us is somehow magically making them stronger. Unemployment is higher and productivity and income lower in both places; the root causes of these things are not going away. Don't worry about overseas boogeymen, just be your own best and work to elect constitutional conservatives. The free-est nation will always be the richest and most powerful nation, whether or not she happens to be manufacturing automobiles.

Ronald Reagan Was Right.
He said, government is not the solution, it's the problem. He apparently had a better crystal ball than most intellectuals have.

According to Bill
According to Bill... O'Reilly, it's the management not unions to blame for the decline of the auto industry. He repeats this mantra all the time.
Yes, there's a mismanagement, adverse market conditions and, yes, greed (an unavoidable component of the capitalist economy, in my opinion.)
But "regular people", "poor workers" at conveyer belts - what do they have to do with mismanagement, cries the number one idiot on Fox News Alan Colms? And like in a Communist country, every guest on Fox nods in agreement that it's the Wall Street fault, not the Main street!

In my opinion, the unions and their Democrat protectors in Congress are at least as guilty as management, if not more. Protected by the union contracts, assembly line workers do not compete, do not need to invest in themselves in form of advanced education; yet, their salaries compared to the top professionals, like machinists, for example, are at least twice as much.
In the New York Metro area, a machinist first class working in small or mid size company makes about $50,000 annually, often with very basic benefits or without them altogether. But it takes approximately 4 to 5 years to develop machinist first class, longer than for totally unneeded psychologists; historians; creative writing, English, government studies or communication majors in a 4 year college.
Capitalist economy cannot tolerate discrepancies like these and now we see the results.

It is only in Socialism where politics of government controls wedges and salaries, not the free market, that unqualified worker makes more than an engineer. Ask immigrants from the Soviet Union. No wonder, the USSR was the "workers paradise".

With Barak, Reid and Pelozi at the helm and the press formally free but de facto Liberal Democrat, where is this country going?


Winston
You have a point regarding unions. My husband's career involved supplying the paper industry's paper machines with repairs and new equipment. His job included visiting the mills and doing roll surveys. He's had to wait for more than an hour at times til (for example) a union electrician could be found to change a bloomin' fuse..all the while his time doing nothing but waiting was costing the mill $ not to mention the $$ to pay the union electrician. What's wrong with this picture? It's the same picture.
With our 9% majority in a feather your nest bed with the unions, and special interests is it any wonder we are in this financial mess? These
elected king and queenlets should be indicted for RICO violations. but they won't, they make sure their own portfolios are safe while impoverishing generations with increasing taxation. I think we could say we have come full circle..we are now enduring another round of taxation without representation.
we see in the Auto industry.

It's Not Socialism....
Socialism is "social" like cyanide is nutrientional. So let's stop using the soft-sounding term "socialist" to describe control-freak politicians. They need control in the same sense an alcoholic needs liquor -- for their own consumption. All the rest about saving the climate, the children, the economy or whatever, is just cover.

Regards,

Edit: It's Not Socialism....
oops,"nutritional" not "nutrientional"
Socialism is "social" like cyanide is nutritional. So let's stop using the soft-sounding term "socialist" to describe control-freak politicians. They need control in the same sense an alcoholic needs liquor -- for their own consumption. All the rest about saving the climate, the children, the economy or whatever, is just cover.

Regards,

blame game
Jonah....Don't forget to acknowledge the role Alan Greenspan and his minions at the Federal Reserve played in the current debacle. These generous souls, supposedly beyond the control/influence of Congress, artificially kept interest rates below market over an extended period of time so that many bubbles were created culminating in the real estate debacle. What was Congress doing about this miscalculation? Oh yes, encouraging The Fed to lower interest rates further. Nice. But I've got the solution to all our troubles. Let's have a simple quiz on American History and economics administered to all would be members of congress. Fail and you are not admitted until you pass. My guess is we'd be down to about a dozen or so worthies of the current Congress managing to qualify for their positions. Things don't look good.

Whatever...
I don't know about this author.
Seems rather Smug, foggy, and
fat-headed in his style. Note the contrast he makes with his general set of beliefs and those who don't share them. They are the "Chicken Littles." Is that meant to impress?

the "problem" with the economy . . .
can be plainly seen by those who care to look. Our "production" is rapidly being off-shored for "economic" reasons.
"Free trade" is not "free". Other countries keep out American products to protect their own industries. A tit-for-tat system could work to truly have "free trade". Free trade is looked upon as providing cheaper products for Americans. Cheaper products don't do any good if people are unemployed due to off-shoring.
CEOs and other corporate types get paid millions for shepherding their corporations into bankruptcy.
Banks and other financial institutions get an infusion of cash with no accountability.
All the high up muckety-mucks that run these so-called "business schools" in the universities have it all wrong.
There has to be a symbiotic relationship between the stockholders, producers and consumers. The problem now is not "lack of credit" but "lack of confidence" by consumers. They see their jobs being off-shored and are prudently cutting back, thinking "I could be next". An auto company official was bragging about his company's use of robots to a union official; the union official remarked that "robots don't buy cars".
Henry Ford had it right when he paid his workers $5.00 per day; the average wage at that time was about $1.50 per day. The Wall Street tycoons howled that the end of capitalism was at hand. Mr. Ford CREATED a market where none had previously existed. At that time, cars were seen as playthings for the rich. In subsequent years, the price of an automobile DROPPED considerably.
Did you know that the "big 3" automakers FOREIGN operations are doing well?

Tea Party
Socialism is the well intentioned suicide, only the masses don't know it until it's too late. The engine of prosperity is competition in a free marketplace. So I agree with you. Thank you.

Daniel -- IL 10:09AM EST
"I just don't get it...."
___________

Well I don't get it either.

Thank you for your post. I appreciate its content.

Can't play the tape to the end
People and pundits can't resist playing out a future scenario without considering the law that for ever action there is a reaction.

Take the Iraq war.

People just couldn't fathom that elements in Iraq would react to the occupation and we would have setbacks or have to replan. I am surprised we were able to hang through the tough times with a country that can't see more than 1 chess move ahead. We couldn't lose a knight before they declared we had lost control of the board.

Most things like this economic crisis, the victory by the democrats or the rise of Japan have negative feedback loops. The more you get of it of the greater the pushback becomes.

All of these kind of things run wild at first because no reaction to them has effectively formed yet. (Throw in global warming with this)The results of their "success" hasn't had repercussions yet.

I would point out to my fellow conservatives and republicans that before they start panicking that they need to change the party they need to be aware that the results of democratic rule have not kicked in yet. The debacle of the Democratic congress wasn't even recognized as theirs by 50% of the population. Do you think there won't be room for debate when they start a leftist agneda they have to take credit for?

Ask yourselves why Obama is hestiating so much to even HINT left.

My theory is he KNOWS this backlash would happen if he does what he promised to do and is trying to figure out a way to sneak it in later after he woes the public as the great uniter.

Irregardless, let's not change ourselves because the day will come when people want ANOTHER option and it better not be democrat lite (nor does it need to be). Hear me all you clowns who want to kick out social conservatives.

Irregardless
Irregardless originated in dialectal American speech in the early 20th century. Its fairly widespread use in speech called it to the attention of usage commentators as early as 1927. The most frequently repeated remark about it is that “there is no such word.” There is such a word, however. It is still used primarily in speech, although it can be found from time to time in edited prose. Its reputation has not risen over the years, and it is still a long way from general acceptance. Use regardless instead.

Credentialism in America
Intellectual elites are almost always wrong about everything because the media and masses assume the alphabet soup that follows a name endows an individual with powers of divination. In a country where knowledge is available to all at the price of an effort, shouldn't we view any claims about the future predicted by a handful of "experts" with extreme skepticism? Especially when the solutions to the perceived problems involve giving up more of our individual liberties?

The U.S. has a dynamic economy. I believe that is the single reason we have overcome prognostications by so-called experts. When we try to control markets, more of these dire predictions come true. The answer to any and all of our problems and challenges is to expand free markets and focus our efforts on producing better, more moral individuals, not more educated ones.

Romanticism
We are in an age of romanticism which emphasizes feeling and sentiment over reason. I grew up in a very rational post war world and it makes me sick to see congressional hearings on 35B that are all emotion. So I watched Fox Saturday biz lineup where nearly everyone "belileves" stimulus is good without any evidence, at all. Soundbites are incomplete thoughts.

Yep! Intellectuals are SO smart!
Intellectuals loved Stalin. In fact, they made pilgramages to the USSR to kiss his ring and marvel at his "utopia" even while millions were killed, imprisoned or starved in the Ukraine.

Many absolutely had Big-O's over Mussolini and even Hitler.

Sean Penn and William Ayres love Hugo Chavez and Castro's Cuban socialist system.

Yep! Intellectuals are SO much smarter than reality and "common" people. If intellectuals are "smart", then I would prefer to be dumb.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.